coaching?
Comments
-
off the back wrote:I dont doubt your ability but that is aside from the basis of the argument. As I have said previously if ride your bike more you will get better - who is to say a more scientific approach would not produce even greater benefits. If you want to use your interpretation of the science that is out there good luck and I hope you win plenty more.
I cannot agree with some of your statements like -
"LT training is defined as the pace that you can sustain for a 25 mile TT."
There is no basis for this. Different riders can push themselves further so there is no consistency and hence no basis to your statement.
LT is linked to what is happening in the body with regard to how you are coping with the production of lactate acid - "The lactate threshold (LT) is the exercise intensity at which lactic acid starts to accumulate in the blood stream.". If you go to a lab you can identify the heart rate that this occurs at very accuratly if ride by feel your are estimating. Your LT interval training should be based on staying just below this. If you estimate on feel you can very easily be anerobic and limit your development. This is not to say that you will not improve more that scienctific studies prove you will not improve to the same dgree.
Also 25mile TT are ridden anerobically for the vast majority of people. My Lactate threshold is 173 and I ride 25mile TT at 184-186avg.
Anaerobic means working without oxygen i.e. oxygen debt - maximum effort 1 minute
This is when the demands for oxygen exceed supply.
Surprised you keep harping on about anaerobic activity in a TT. It's not, it's all aerobic.
Anyway I thought you said that you couldn't reason where there is no logic.
Look the trouble with any testing is the assumption that it is specific to all and every training situation. As you have correctly pointed out there are plenty of mitigating factors affecting a rider on any particular day. Using HR (notwithstanding cardiac drift) as a guide isn't on for that very reason. The only other measurement tool is power and I'm not convinced on the accuracy of that either.
The only consistent thing is PE and how you feel because that is directly related to all mitigating factors. So on the contrary I believe that science is less accurate in this respect.0 -
There are two types of anaerobic energy systems, the ATP-PCr energy system, which uses creatine phosphate as the main energy source, and the lactic acid (or anaerobic glycolysis) system that uses glucose (or glycogen) in the absence of oxygen. Events or activity that lasts up to thirty seconds relies almost exclusively on the former, phosphagen, system. Beyond this first thirty seconds the lactic acid system begins to predominate.
Therefore when you are time trialling you are burning glycogen anaerobically. You glycogen stores will support up to perhaps 2hrs with carbo loading. So up to a 50mile TT you can potentially operate anaerobic.
We will have to agree to differ on the value of testing.0 -
off the back wrote:There are two types of anaerobic energy systems, the ATP-PCr energy system, which uses creatine phosphate as the main energy source, and the lactic acid (or anaerobic glycolysis) system that uses glucose (or glycogen) in the absence of oxygen. Events or activity that lasts up to thirty seconds relies almost exclusively on the former, phosphagen, system. Beyond this first thirty seconds the lactic acid system begins to predominate.
Therefore when you are time trialling you are burning glycogen anaerobically. You glycogen stores will support up to perhaps 2hrs with carbo loading. So up to a 50mile TT you can potentially operate anaerobic.
We will have to agree to differ on the value of testing.
Well as we are splitting hairs.
The amount of anaerobic energy used in a TT of 10 miles is less than10% of the total energy used. For a + 25 mile TT this reduces to about 2%. 2%0 -
I think PE is all very well if you have the experience to listen to your body and understand what it is telling you. Perhaps more scientific measurements can help shorten that learning curve. For example, if you are setting out to do a particular session, and find you can't hit the numbers, it could be because of illness or fatigue (physical issues) or mental fatigue (you just might not be "up for" the session). Correlating this with HR or power could tell you if it is physical (i.e. the HR and power are down a bit) or not. The way I look at it, power will give you a great insight into the physiological aspects of your training (how you are developing) but not so the mental ones.
And PE can vary, depending on the length of the ride and many other conditions. I would say it is very subjective. For example, on my 2x20 intervals, I am hitting the same power all the way through, but my PE varies thus: at the start, I feel "Bloody hell, this is hard" as I get warmed up. Then by the end of the first interval, it's "This is fine, maybe I should have started at a higher intensity". A few minutes into the second interval, it's "Uh-oh, this is going to be the longest twenty minutes of my life" and by the end it's I think "I'm going to throw up!". But power has been constant the whole way through. I personally would find it hard to replicate such a constant output of power on the road going only by PE. Sure, I would probably still be in the right intensity ballpark, but it wouldn't be quite so dead on.
I suspect what we really want to measure is how our "engine" is coping with the power it is putting out and the strain being placed upon it. In an ideal world, the body's efficiency would be constant, and so power measurements would be a good measure of what our engine is doing. The fact that you can have small variations in the body's efficiency due to other factors (level of fatigue, onset of ilness, heat etc.) has always made me wonder just what effect these factors would have on power, but I guess at the end of the day this is probably not measureable.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
off the back wrote:There are two types of anaerobic energy systems, the ATP-PCr energy system, which uses creatine phosphate as the main energy source, and the lactic acid (or anaerobic glycolysis) system that uses glucose (or glycogen) in the absence of oxygen. Events or activity that lasts up to thirty seconds relies almost exclusively on the former, phosphagen, system. Beyond this first thirty seconds the lactic acid system begins to predominate.
Therefore when you are time trialling you are burning glycogen anaerobically. You glycogen stores will support up to perhaps 2hrs with carbo loading. So up to a 50mile TT you can potentially operate anaerobic.
We will have to agree to differ on the value of testing.
You need to go and carefully read a textbook on Aerobic energy systems. And find out about alactic systems.
What you are saying is that you can ride for 2 hours without the need for air ?0 -
When you start to exercise you burn fat as your energy source as the intensity increases you start to burn glycogen (+fat). You dont stop burning fat i.e During anaerobic respiration aerobic respiration will still continue to occur to burn the fat! Anerobic respiration is providing energy in addition to what aerobic respiration is providing. Nobody is suggesting that you dont need air for a 50mile TT.
I read the textbook carefully in Uni ;-)0 -
off the back wrote:When you start to exercise you burn fat as your energy source as the intensity increases you start to burn glycogen (+fat). You dont stop burning fat i.e During anaerobic respiration aerobic respiration will still continue to occur to burn the fat! Anerobic respiration is providing energy in addition to what aerobic respiration is providing. Nobody is suggesting that you dont need air for a 50mile TT.
I read the textbook carefully in Uni ;-)
At about 40+ minutes the proportion of anaerobic energy used at a maximal effort for the duration is approx 2%. Hardly a big deal in terms of overall energy sources. To all intents and purposes it's all aerobic (98%).0 -
off the back wrote:When you start to exercise you burn fat as your energy source as the intensity increases you start to burn glycogen (+fat). You don't stop burning fat i.e During anaerobic respiration aerobic respiration will still continue to occur to burn the fat! Anerobic respiration is providing energy in addition to what aerobic respiration is providing. Nobody is suggesting that you dont need air for a 50mile TT.
I read the textbook carefully in Uni ;-)
What you are implying is that aerobic respiration = fat burning and anaerobic respiration = glycogen burning. This is wrong.
I am not disputing that all three energy systems (ATP-CP; Glycolysis:Aerobic) are always in play whatever the duration of the exercise, but even after 90 secs over 50% of energy comes from the aerobic system.
I still suggest that you re read the text book or look up anaerobic and aerobic respiration on the internet.0 -
"It's an aerobic sport, dammit!" ~ A Coggan
OTB - TT's are definitely aerobic, using oxygen when "burning" both glycogen and fatty acids to create energy.
If you were able to go completely anaerobic for more than a few minutes you'd probably be dead. Of course our bodies don't allow that to happen.
If you'd like to measure the relative proportion of energy supply that comes from anaerobic and aerobic energy production, then it can actually be estimated by analysing power meter data and determining your Maximal Accumulated Oxygen Deficit (MAOD). It mostly applies to very short term efforts, usually track cycling events up to individual and team pursuits. Here's an item on the topic I did a little while back:
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2007/02/ ... rsuit.html0 -
chrisw12 wrote:I
For you Mike, since you are training yourself, you are both the coach and the pupil so you are therefore testing yourself all of the time anyway.
I'm learning what to coach and it all makes perfect sense. Unfortunately there aren't enough hours or days in the week to fit it all in. Endurance rides of 3 hours+, Recovery rides, circuit training, strength/weight training, interval training, and rest days. It's all doing my head in. I need a drink.0 -
Mike Willcox wrote:chrisw12 wrote:I
For you Mike, since you are training yourself, you are both the coach and the pupil so you are therefore testing yourself all of the time anyway.
I'm learning what to coach and it all makes perfect sense. Unfortunately there aren't enough hours or days in the week to fit it all in. Endurance rides of 3 hours+, Recovery rides, circuit training, strength/weight training, interval training, and rest days. It's all doing my head in. I need a drink.
because my heads gone as well, tried riding home on the route I've been bragging about being the best commute in the world and it was an absolute nightmare. Rain like you'd get from a pressure washer and wind that had me thinking about walking :oops: . Makes you wonder why you bother, so I've hit the bottle (well cans really as I'm working class.) as well.0
